How do y'all rate Kelly Hrudey

hacksaw7

Registered User
Dec 3, 2020
1,288
1,355
Im definitely one of those most

I find Moogs style to be very stuck in the late-70s early-80s and it becomes a progressively bigger problem the longer he plays.

In addition to the glove hand mentioned, Fuhrs tracking is so good I think hed hold up in any era

To me they were absolutely equal in my mind for a stretch up until Moog to Boston

Funny thing is I never really got around to looking at their save %'s of the era...I just glanced at 1983-1987

Moog
.882
.895
.889
.881

Fuhr
.883
.884
.890
.881

Insane how close they were at times
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,697
84,599
Vancouver, BC
I've never understood that. Much as Canucks' fans cathartically blame Mark Messier for their organization's failures after the mid-1990s, so Canadian fans blamed Mike Liut for two so-so periods, with no team support, against one of the most talented teams ever.

It was easier to just 'blame the goalie' for the 8-1 loss and pretend that Canada was still better at hockey than the USSR and than it was to admit that they completely, totally outclassed us and tore us to shreds. I spent years believing the narrative that 'Liut blew it' until I actually watched the game and it looked like men against boys and basically every goal was a player all alone in front of the net. 1 of the 8 goals was slightly suspect and Liut made a bunch of excellent saves, too.

Liut was unfairly scapegoated to preserve Canadian pride, essentially.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hockey Outsider

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,697
84,599
Vancouver, BC
Im definitely one of those most

I find Moogs style to be very stuck in the late-70s early-80s and it becomes a progressively bigger problem the longer he plays.

In addition to the glove hand mentioned, Fuhrs tracking is so good I think hed hold up in any era

Moog and Fuhr's careers overlapped for 15 years and other than the 87-88 season where Fuhr was outstanding and Moog was holding out and playing in the Olympics, it's hard to find a season where Fuhr was better in the regular seasons. 1995-96 I guess, when Moog was 36 years old.

Moog and Fuhr were a tandem for 5 full seasons in Edmonton and 2 of the seasons Moog was clearly better and the other 3 the numbers were virtually identical. Moog went 7-0 in the playoffs for that team in their Cup years. It was just a case where Fuhr got hot in the '84 Cup run and then became the guy for the future runs after that. If they'd played Moog, I don't think the results would have been any different.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Normand Lacombe

Nerowoy nora tolad

Registered User
May 9, 2018
1,407
654
Gladstone, Australia
Moog and Fuhr's careers overlapped for 15 years and other than the 87-88 season where Fuhr was outstanding and Moog was holding out and playing in the Olympics, it's hard to find a season where Fuhr was better in the regular seasons. 1995-96 I guess, when Moog was 36 years old.

Moog and Fuhr were a tandem for 5 full seasons in Edmonton and 2 of the seasons Moog was clearly better and the other 3 the numbers were virtually identical. Moog went 7-0 in the playoffs for that team in their Cup years. It was just a case where Fuhr got hot in the '84 Cup run and then became the guy for the future runs after that. If they'd played Moog, I don't think the results would have been any different.
What are you basing their numbers on?
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,697
84,599
Vancouver, BC
What are you basing their numbers on?

1982-83
Moog .891 3.54
Fuhr .867 4.30

1983-84
Moog .882 3.78
Fuhr .883 3.91

1984-85
Moog .895 3.30
Fuhr .884 3.87

1985-86
Moog .889 3.70
Fuhr .890 3.93

1986-87
Moog .881 3.52
Fuhr .881 3.44


1982-87 Moog 79 GSAA, Fuhr 41 GSAA.

There can't really be any argument that Moog wasn't better in the regular season in the 5 years they platooned 50:50 together. Again, 2 seasons where Moog has a clear advantage, 3 where it's basically dead even. Fuhr never clearly better.
 

Nerowoy nora tolad

Registered User
May 9, 2018
1,407
654
Gladstone, Australia
1982-83
Moog .891 3.54
Fuhr .867 4.30

1983-84
Moog .882 3.78
Fuhr .883 3.91

1984-85
Moog .895 3.30
Fuhr .884 3.87

1985-86
Moog .889 3.70
Fuhr .890 3.93

1986-87
Moog .881 3.52
Fuhr .881 3.44


1982-87 Moog 79 GSAA, Fuhr 41 GSAA.

There can't really be any argument that Moog wasn't better in the regular season in the 5 years they platooned 50:50 together. Again, 2 seasons where Moog has a clear advantage, 3 where it's basically dead even. Fuhr never clearly better.
two thoughts:

IIRC is save percentage fully supportable pre 2006 as the data disproving repeatable shot quality only exists post-lockout

Is it not also possible that the difference in GAA is due to Sather lining up the backup for easier matchups?
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,697
84,599
Vancouver, BC
two thoughts:

IIRC is save percentage fully supportable pre 2006 as the data disproving repeatable shot quality only exists post-lockout

Is it not also possible that the difference in GAA is due to Sather lining up the backup for easier matchups?

Obviously there are no advanced stats available from this time. But save % over a 5-year stretch behind the same team should be a pretty solid basis for comparison.

I've never seen anything to suggest that Moog was given easier starts.

Starts against Calgary over that 5-year stretch were 24-16 Fuhr against Calgary (slight edge there) and 8-7 Fuhr against Boston and 8-7 Moog against Philly in terms of Eastern powerhouses. I don't think there looks to be anything there that could be substantially swinging the numbers. If it was 30-10 Fuhr in Calgary starts maybe there would be an argument there.
 

Jim MacDonald

Registered User
Oct 7, 2017
705
180
If cool to ask without "stepping on the toes" of the OP, can anyone elaborate on something I've seen/heard (and maybe seen or heard by others) that in the 92-93 season....I want to say around the midway point of the season....Hrudey had said something to the effect of "we were working really hard to save my career." I don't know if the "we" meant him and a goaltending coach....or if this is a much broader statement as to him and the King's brass etc?
 

hacksaw7

Registered User
Dec 3, 2020
1,288
1,355
If cool to ask without "stepping on the toes" of the OP, can anyone elaborate on something I've seen/heard (and maybe seen or heard by others) that in the 92-93 season....I want to say around the midway point of the season....Hrudey had said something to the effect of "we were working really hard to save my career." I don't know if the "we" meant him and a goaltending coach....or if this is a much broader statement as to him and the King's brass etc?

We had a really good start to the 1992-93 season, even though we were missing Gretzky for the first three months. He had that terrible back and we didn’t know if he was going to make it back or if it was even going to be a career-ending injury.
I got off to a great start but around December, and for a full two months after, I went into the worst slump of my career. I was terrible. I went from being okay to the worst goalie in the NHL without question. So finally, with the help of my coach Barry Melrose, he introduced me to Anthony Robbins. I was able to work with Anthony personally and right my career and find the mental toughness that somehow I had lost. And Wayne rejoined us in January. We started playing really well again in February and March.

Kelly Hrudey: My worst hockey memory of all
 

frisco

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame...
Sep 14, 2017
3,598
2,695
Northern Hemisphere
Barrasso is freaking weird.

He had 5 absolutely elite Vezina-calibre/contending type seasons where he was very clearly one of the best goalies on earth. 83-84, 84-85, 87-88, 92-93, 97-98. And strong performances on two Cup winners.

But he played for 20 years. And outside of those 5 years, he was mostly injured or crap for the other 15 years. He's probably the most erratic player in NHL history when you consider the heights of his best seasons relative to the majority of years surrounding those.

It makes him really hard to rate. His peak value is definitely HHOF-calibre. But if Tom Barrasso was your starting goalie, you had an ineffective/injured player far more seasons than you had the elite version.
I always wondered why some guys like Barrasso, when he battled injuries it's a knock against him, but for Peter Forsberg or Pavel Bure it just adds to their cred ("imagine what he would've done if he was healthy!").

My Best-Carey
 

Nerowoy nora tolad

Registered User
May 9, 2018
1,407
654
Gladstone, Australia
Did he though? It's my impression that the goalies got fairly equal schedules.

Obviously there are no advanced stats available from this time. But save % over a 5-year stretch behind the same team should be a pretty solid basis for comparison.

I've never seen anything to suggest that Moog was given easier starts.

Starts against Calgary over that 5-year stretch were 24-16 Fuhr against Calgary (slight edge there) and 8-7 Fuhr against Boston and 8-7 Moog against Philly in terms of Eastern powerhouses. I don't think there looks to be anything there that could be substantially swinging the numbers. If it was 30-10 Fuhr in Calgary starts maybe there would be an argument there.

One thing I am noticing in those numbers:

Outside of Fuhrs poor 83 season, their save percentages are almost identical with moog having a lower GAA every season except for the last one. He is significantly higher in Sv% in 84-85, but I did a back of the envelope and found if their sv percentages were equal that year moogs GAA would still be 3.62 to Fuhrs 3.87. If the save percentages are equal with differing GAAs, doesnt that imply the higher GAA must be seeing more shots?
 

Normand Lacombe

Registered User
Jan 30, 2008
1,442
1,352
I always wondered why some guys like Barrasso, when he battled injuries it's a knock against him, but for Peter Forsberg or Pavel Bure it just adds to their cred ("imagine what he would've done if he was healthy!").

My Best-Carey

Not saying this is right, but Bure and Forsberg seemed more likable than Barrasso. At least that is the perception. While Barrasso was a highly intelligent and competitive person, he didn't care for the media's perception of him. In turn, the media rarely gave Barrasso the benefit of the doubt and most fans looked at Barrasso in a negative light. Just my two cents.
 
  • Like
Reactions: frisco

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,253
15,847
Tokyo, Japan
It was easier to just 'blame the goalie' for the 8-1 loss and pretend that Canada was still better at hockey than the USSR and than it was to admit that they completely, totally outclassed us and tore us to shreds. I spent years believing the narrative that 'Liut blew it' until I actually watched the game and it looked like men against boys and basically every goal was a player all alone in front of the net. 1 of the 8 goals was slightly suspect and Liut made a bunch of excellent saves, too.

Liut was unfairly scapegoated to preserve Canadian pride, essentially.
I get what you're saying, but are you aware that Team Canada smoked the same USSR team 7 - 3 only days prior?

Still, I think there's something to what you're saying. The game is before my time, but from watching the highlights I recall it was a pretty close game until the third period when the Soviets pounced on every mistake Canada made and ran up the score. I think the game was won in the first two periods, after which it was 4 (?) to 1. I'd have to go back and see how many of those first 4 are Liut's "fault"...
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,697
84,599
Vancouver, BC
I get what you're saying, but are you aware that Team Canada smoked the same USSR team 7 - 3 only days prior?

Still, I think there's something to what you're saying. The game is before my time, but from watching the highlights I recall it was a pretty close game until the third period when the Soviets pounced on every mistake Canada made and ran up the score. I think the game was won in the first two periods, after which it was 4 (?) to 1. I'd have to go back and see how many of those first 4 are Liut's "fault"...

It’s been about 5 years again since I watched that game. Yes, aware of the previous result but on this day the Soviets were just miles better.

Guy Lafleur looked like a player from 1970 playing against players from 1995.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,253
15,847
Tokyo, Japan
Moog and Fuhr's careers overlapped for 15 years and other than the 87-88 season where Fuhr was outstanding and Moog was holding out and playing in the Olympics, it's hard to find a season where Fuhr was better in the regular seasons. 1995-96 I guess, when Moog was 36 years old.
That's probably fair, but recall that when Moog left Edmonton he went to a defense-first team (Boston), whereas Fuhr went to no-defence teams (Buffalo and L.A.). Then, Moog went to another defence-first team that was on the rise (Dallas). In terms of clubs played for, Moog may well be the single "luckiest" goalie who played for three or more teams.

That said, I agree Moog was an above-average goalie of the 1980s through early-1990s... in the regular season.
Moog went 7-0 in the playoffs for that team in their Cup years. It was just a case where Fuhr got hot in the '84 Cup run and then became the guy for the future runs after that. If they'd played Moog, I don't think the results would have been any different.
Hmm, I dunno about that. Through the 1983-84 regular season, Moog had played far more playoff games than Fuhr, and had won 4 playoff series, while Fuhr had won zero. Then, why did the coaching staff plug Fuhr to play most of the all-important 1984 playoff games?

Looking back at it, Fuhr played all three games vs. Winnipeg. Then, he played all of the first four vs. Calgary, with Edmonton up 3 games to 1. Fuhr had a rough night in game five, and was pulled midway for Moog who stopped 13 of 13. However, the coaching staff went right back to Fuhr for game six (which the Oilers lost in overtime). Somewhat surprisingly, the coaching staff then switched to Moog to start game seven... and Moog let in 3 of 8 shots, before being pulled in the 2nd. Fuhr came in, and stopped 14 of 15 and the Oilers won. In round three (vs. Minnesota), they went right back to Fuhr. In game two, Fuhr was seemingly pulled again -- or maybe they just rested him? -- after 42 minutes of play, despite the clubs being tied (Moog credited with the "win", but faced only 7 shots). With the Oilers comfortably up by two games, they finally started Moog in game three... and he let in 5 goals in eight minutes of play in the second period. Only a miracle comeback by Edmonton in the third allowed them to win again. They put Fuhr back in in game four, and he stopped 24 of 25 shots to close out the series. As you know, Fuhr started in the Finals: 34-save shutout in game one, rough night in game two (but they still didn't put in Moog, despite the score getting out of hand), and was going great guns in game three until he was injured in the third period. Moog went in and played well to finish off the Islanders.

So, anyway, it wasn't a case of "he got hot so they rode him", but rather that the Oilers' coaching staff clearly chose Fuhr to start all the big 1984 series and games, and twice when Moog did get key starts (game 7 of round two, and game 3 of round three), he blew it with poor performances.

Thereafter, the Oilers' staff almost always preferred Fuhr, giving Moog only a few starts in the playoffs, generally when the series was already over with the Oilers up 3-0.

I'm not saying that decision was correct, but that was a conscious choice by the Oilers' staff.

My own take on would be that in the regular season the two goalies were very even in the 1980s, but that in the playoffs (1982 obviously excepted) Fuhr was superior. Whereas Fuhr tended to elevate his game to rarefied levels under pressure (see: 1986 game six vs. Calgary and 1987 game seven vs. Philly, for masterful performances), Moog generally did not (1984 Finals being an exception, but he really only had to be average even then to get the wins). And in the 1988 and 1990 Finals (against Edmonton), Moog was actually kind of brutal.
 
Last edited:

Albatros

Registered User
Aug 19, 2017
12,556
7,990
Ostsee
Another thing to note is that Fuhr was catching right, so playing him always posed an additional challenge to the opposing team.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,146
Mike Liut would not have been allowed anywhere near the 87 Canada Cup team and we all know why.

He wouldn't have, no. Whether that is right or justified is another story. Funny thing is, he finished 3rd in Hart voting in 1987 and was a 2nd in Vezina voting. But they never forgave him for 1981.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hacksaw7

MarkusKetterer

Shoulda got one game in
I remember his badass gear with his Hollywood mask and film reel pads by Vic, then his Sharks set up having a bunch of sharks on it when he played for San Jose. I also picture his saves being more reflex and athleticism based than letting the puck just hit him like the style of now.

Also I remember this for being one of the best “action” cards when I was a kid:

Kelly-Hrudey.jpg
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad